Best movie ever!

a film so unique, intoxicating and bizarre that it not only demands another viewing, but is also forgivable as a satirical comedy where the jokes eventually take the back seat.

The story, direction, characters, and writing/dialogue is akin to taking a tranquilizer shot to the neck, but everything else was so well done.

By the time the dramatic fireworks start popping off, each one feels earned.

I started listening to Joy Division very recently and after liking a lot of their songs and doing a lot of reading about the band and Ian Curtis, I thought it would be a good idea to give this movie a watch, since the band had such a low life span and Ian Curtis was a very interesting character.The movie described Ian Curtis as "sad", "quiet", and an "outcast", and I'm sure in real life he was, but in the movie Curtis just acts like a regular guy, it isn't really until he gets on stage and starts performing when Sam Riley starts to transform himself into Curtis with his strange dancing and awkward eye movements. I don't necessarily think this is Sam Riley's fault, maybe the director should take the blame for that, it would've been really nice to see him act more like an outsider that had a hard time fitting in with the rest of the band and society. Another glaring issue I had was that I felt absolutely no sympathy for Ian Curtis during this movie, he marries his brothers girlfriend, has a child with her, and then cheats on her, and then starts to get angry with her for wanting a divorce because he's having an affair. If anything I felt more sympathy for Debbie than Ian, she's constantly making tea for him and taking care of their child but Ian just acts like a total jackass and has a bunch of seizures. I don't know if this was on purpose? I don't remember hearing that Ian Curtis was a jerk in real life but maybe he was? This combined with him not really acting like a sad outcast at all just makes the movie feel kind of phony to me.The length of the movie is perfect, I usually feel like a lot of movies I watch go on for a bit too long, but the length wasn't an issue at all for me-- What was an issue was how they structured the movie within the running time, they should've focused a lot more on how Ian Curtis joined the band, and them growing together, but there's barely any of that in the movie which is a shame because a lot of the time that's the most interesting part of a rock band.The main things that I enjoyed were the visuals, there were a lot of great shots that mix in perfectly with the black and white, also I love the fact that the movie is in black and white since almost every image of the band and Ian Curtis that you can find is in black and white. A lot of the acting was great but like I said earlier I think the main issue might've been directing and writing. Another thing I enjoyed were the live performances, mainly since this is really the only time in the movie where I felt like Sam Riley was acting like Ian Curtis, and they definitely did a good job of mirroring the few live performances of Joy Division that are on video.In conclusion I was a bit underwhelmed with the movie, if you're a fan of Joy Division you've probably already watched it, and if you're not a fan of Joy Division then there's not really any reason to watch it.

This was a truly outstanding film. Granted I am a huge fan of this genre, period, and feel that some the music that came out of the UK in the 1970's and 1980's was hugely influential, important, and absolutely timeless. Of course, there is no arguing the influence Joy Division had, and their subsequent follow up act, New Order. Curtis was able to evoke such emotion, such power, more than likely due to his state of mind, and the chaotic emotional state he had to endure.Shot in gorgeous, classic black and white, the Ian Curtis biopic doesn't seem to care if you like Joy Division, the influential post-punk band Curtis fronted. It simply presents a taut, emotionally wrenching narrative. And I never really got the post punk genre title. Is that the best they could do? How about pre-electronica? Or crazy inventive. Or mind numbingly stupendous? Joy Division released only two proper albums in its short history, but the group disproportionately influenced the music that followed. Fans will enjoy the re-creations of seminal shows and recording sessions, staged with authority by director Anton Corbijn, who photographed the band and its peers in the '70s and '80s.But even non-fans will appreciate the cinematography and note-perfect performances, which seem to evoke a certain dread of 1970s working-class England. We see young Curtis, played with appropriate understatement by Sam Riley, worshiping David Bowie, Iggy Pop and Lou Reed in his bedroom in Macclesfield, England, in 1973. He tries on makeup, smokes endless cigarettes and carefully organizes his darkly poetic writing into binders. Who knew what an extraordinary songwriter he was to become?Riley's performance immediately sets the tone, his giant, uncertain eyes rejecting our sympathy and attempts to reduce him to an archetype. He marries his high school crush, Deborah (Samantha Morton), at age 19 as his band (first called Warsaw) slowly ascends.Curtis' inner life, rendered through rich, stifling close-ups, is wracked with guilt and self-doubt, whether it's for cheating on his wife with the beautiful French gal Annik Honoré (Alexandra Maria Lara) or dealing with his worsening epilepsy and obsession with mortality. He is obviously in a lot more pain that we know, and does a reasonably good job of showing it.The film is a quiet study. It is ponderous at times. But, in the end, it is a strong, self assured film, that really hits the mark.

Astonishingly well acted film, so much so that it seems unfair to single out any of the performances. Mr. Lawrence's camera sense is as sure and unobtrusive as his feel for acting. The movie just seems to happen, to grow out of the ground like a thorny plant, revealing the intricate intelligence of its design only in hindsight. As a JD fan, I thought it was done in a way that even non-JD fans could enjoy it. All of the actors playing the JD band members actually played their instruments and performed those songs... it wasn't just Reilly overdubbing vocals over original JD recordings! That is something that really impresses me about the skills of the actors chosen for the band. True, Curtis was a genius, but he was also human... I felt this film was grounded in reality without trying to evangelize/make a martyr out of Curtis.

I'm not greatly into the whole Joy Division / New Order musical trip, finding the music too grim and never forgiving the Nazi-chic of their deliberately chosen band names. Plus I remember at the time reading in the music press of the day the legend "Ian Curtis died for you" and dismissing it as sheer hyperbole. After watching this movie, I still don't believe the latter but do have a better knowledge of the man behind the myth as well as a better appreciation of the band's music.Unsurprisingly shot in black and white by the celebrated monochromatic rock photographer Anton Corbijn (later associated with his iconic images of Depeche Mode and especially U2), the film is thus rendered bleak and grey, the proper background for the depressed Manchester and Macclesfield locations that were the backdrop to Curtis's life as well, of course as his turbulent life and the group's doomy, powerful music.The movie eschews the traditional celebration of the rising success of the group to the extent you're hardly aware of their popularity at all. All the way through, Curtis lives in run- down houses and freely moves in everyday locations with hardly admission of his growing celebrity and increasing musical significance. Instead, the film concentrates on his epileptic illness and growing surliness together with his relationships with the two women with whom he had lasting, if difficult relationships, his wife Deborah and his lover, Belgian Embassy attache Annik.I struggled somewhat with the relentlessly downbeat insight into Curtis's life and at times struggled to see how he could attract the attention of the two women who struggle for his attention. A largely absent and disinterested father and husband he cheats on his wife and yet returns to her, lacking the courage to do the honourable thing and move on to let her live her own life. In the end, his depression at his personal conflict, his debilitating illness, addled by his medication and drinking leads him to his final act of self-destruction and of course the debate as to whether this was a heroic or cowardly act.If lacking life and drama (and humour) in the story-telling, there's no questioning the power of the band's music and the recreation of Curtis's hood-eyed, "lost control" whiplash dancing style by Sam Riley is spot on. The acting in support was solid, with an empathetic performance by Samantha Moore as the long-suffering wife and in particular, though relegated to the sidelines, the actors paying the individual Joy Division band members, who as well as looking the part, also convincingly recreate their emotive music.Curtis's story is certainly one worth re-telling given his posthumous elevation to post-punk icon by the music press in the UK in particular. That said, the film didn't exactly move me and never seemed to really get under the skin of its subject, which given the prior knowledge of the inevitable conclusion, lends a slow-motion car-crash perspective to the story's progression.No film about the artist's life here was ever going to be a joyous and uplifting experience, but Corbijn largely treats his subject with sympathy if little real insight. In the end Curtis remains an elusive subject , which may just have been the point of the film in the first place.